Kingmaker would be the second. Yes it is new, but without porting the kingdom building rules (since they are in Ultimate Campaign), could result in a higher page count to develop locations that got a mention but no fleshing out in the campaign ... Like a certain tower on an island.

Oh, and thank you to Alex "Canada Guy" Moore for the art for the board game (this is the third game of mine you have illustrated, isn't it?) and Basil Arnould Price for the artwork for Disturb Not the Dead. :)

I just want to say that Tim and Dain did an awesome job driving this issue into the station. I was kind of discombobulated at the end of 2014. Our fearless Editor-in-Chief pulled off another amazing feat of publishing prowess. And Dain's work on layout is always fantastic. Great job, guys.

Don't forget Garrett. His impact on the layout cannot be understated and he's a big reason that we got it out as soon as we did with all the holiday hoopla thrown into the mix.

As to the "evil does not exist in the real word" arguments being tossed around, I have one question. Do those who believe that evil does not exist in the real world believe that good exists in the real world?

Good is a more generic term. The opposite of good is bad.

For morality, the terms right and wrong, are also generic.

Evil though is very much a Christian concept - the domain of the Devil versus God. So as a concept it doesn't exist in many cultures, not even in pre-Christian European religions.

Good is not a generic term when the concept of alignment is tossed around. As this is the case within this thread, the concept of good would be in consideration of a good-neutral-evil axis, not a good-bad dichotomy.

Yes, yes we do ... though they may be more full of work than we would like sometimes ... of course Wayfinder is not work, but an escape from work. I think we should have everything good to go before the end of the year.

Still not giving spoilers ... though I gotta give a big "Thank You" to Alex "CanadaGuy" Moore ... you know what I'm talking about. ;)

Civilization is not based on creatives who produce works of entertainment being forced to continue to produce work they no longer wish to produce. Demanding they do so is analogous to the boss at a job you are wanting to leave claiming you owe the company since you did good work and forcing you to continue at a job at which you have no desire to continue.

In truth, he could beg you to stay and refuse to rehire you if you come back looking for work. You owe him nothing more than the labor you provided. When you leave, he owes you nothing further unless he feels the desires to give it. The same princie holds for authors and those who paid for the work the author produced.

Absolutely no one has said a damn thing about forcing authors to do any such thing.

Actually, by taking the stance of "if an author does not finish a series that she no longer wishes to work on, folks should no longer purchase her work", you are in essence forcing the author to continue a path she does not want to follow or lose her source of income. It is not holding a physical gun to the head, but it still is a means of force. So, explicitly no one has said anything about forcing an author to do any such thing, but implicitly, yes, yes it was said.

Granted, people should vote with their wallets. It is an effective means to bring about change. But if an author states she has no passion for the series any longer, that she is no longer happy when working on it, should one still continue to demand the creator give up her happiness / enjoyment in the work she wants to do in order to satisfy the Fans desire for closure to a story arc?

EDIT: And to be clear, as I have stated from the beginning, I personally believe there is no obligation on either party's side. The author owes the fan nothing other than the actual books the fan purchased. The fan owes the author nothing beyond the book(s) they have already purchased.

Civilization is not based on creatives who produce works of entertainment being forced to continue to produce work they no longer wish to produce. Demanding they do so is analogous to the boss at a job you are wanting to leave claiming you owe the company since you did good work and forcing you to continue at a job at which you have no desire to continue.

In truth, he could beg you to stay and refuse to rehire you if you come back looking for work. You owe him nothing more than the labor you provided. When you leave, he owes you nothing further unless he feels the desires to give it. The same princie holds for authors and those who paid for the work the author produced.

He was a true actor, able to make us laugh (Mrs. Doubtfire, The Birdcage, and too many others to list), make us cry (What Dreams May come, The Fisher King, and Awakenings are the first ones to come to mind), and make our skin crawl (Insomnia and One Hour Photo). But personally, it was the off the wall roles he played that will stick with me the most (Death to Smoochy and World's Greatest Dad).

Yes! 723 words, sending a really nasty nasty for consideration. It is indeed possible to get a really nasty creature at CR 15 in under 750 words - not easy, but can be done :D

And no laundry list either - I managed to reign myself back some. Kind of. But it did eat my party when I tested it out - lol - poor souls, 5 pc's went in, 3 ran away, 1 crawled away after stabilising herself and, ummmm, one didn't.

So that's 2 out of my possible 3 and a couple of weeks left to try and come up with no 3 ;)

that means you have 27 words you can play with to bolster it's descriptive text ... or the top blurb for a bestiary listing. ;)

So while I am figuring out what to write still, I do want to say thanks for being clearer about article word count. It really helps for those of us who are word count conscious (like me) and want to stay on target.

*sets a course for 1,500 words for her gazetteers*

Glad to hear you are word count conscious, Lady Ophelia. It is definitely a good way to be.

In fact, EVERYONE who submits an article should be word count conscious. I hear that aside from being completely off theme, it is one of the quickest ways to get your submission bumped ... or at least put into the maybe bin ... which with the number of submissions we have been getting is not where you want your submission to be.

This PSA brought to you by the Keep Tim and Paris Sane a Little Longer Foundation, with assistance from Lady Ophelia by supplying a great point for a segue.

... you know how the original FAWTL got started without digging through the archives.

You're on the first page of the origin :-)

And ONLY the first page of the Origin (really, honestly, I swear looking in on those threads sporadically was like jumping into Twin Peaks on every other prime numbered episode and hoping to know what the heck was going on ... of course, that could have been the point ;) Thankfully I never spotted any reverse talking little people when I did pop in).

EDIT: Apparently, I was able to keep up with y'all for 5 pages .. .and then made the mistake of pausing in the posts ...

Glad to hear it! So what were your favorite parts? Were there any articles that really stood out for you? How was the art?

And before anyone actually posts their answers to these questions, why not take that minute or two you were going to spend posting a reply and post a review instead?

What? Too soon after my other request for product reviews?

You know, there is one definite way to get me to stop posting requests for product reviews ... one guess, that's all you get. ;)

EDIT: Seriously though, I am glad to hear everyone is enjoying the issue. I just see "reminding folks about the importance of product reviews" as a secondary job once an issue gets released into the wild.

Seriously, thanks for all the positive feedback folks. If you get a chance we would love to see some reviews posted ... the glow from a positive review (or the insight from a negative review) is, after all, the only form of payment anyone involved with the project gets. ;)

I don't think I've ever met anyone with any experience that thought "Paizo published it, so it must be balanced" was true. Not saying there couldn't be a few people like that out there, but I've never met them.

I have.

To be fair, they don't say "everything Paizo makes is balanced" flat-out. Rather, they simply take it for granted that everything Paizo publishes is allowable in play - there's no discussion about if they can use something, they just show up with a new book and expect that they can use it, being honestly surprised if the GM objects.

Assuming material is balanced and assuming material is allowed are two completely different things. If you run a table and do not outline what is and what is not allowed, you alone are to blame.